Adrian Peterson had some very harsh words about NFL owners on Tuesday, but Ryan Clark may have done him one better.

The Steelers safety (and respected player rep) recently spoke with KDKA-FM. Steelers Rapid Reporter Chuck Finder passed along some of the quotes.

In the interview, Clark took a shot at hereditary owners, including his own. “The difference between us and the owners is, my daddy didn’t give me this job. . . . When I leave this game, I can’t give my jersey to [son] Jordan and tell him to play,” he said. “There are going to be [the Giants’] Maras and Rooneys and all these guys forever who own these teams.”

He reiterated that the CBA is all about money. “We’re not going to play 18 games. That’s not even part of why we don’t have a CBA. You know if they get that money, they don’t care if we play 14 games. That CBA is not getting done because of the money.”

As for what he thinks about NFL lead negotiator Jeff Pash and the league’s proposal on Friday? “There were a lot of things that were brought to us ... it was just insane for us to think about taking. Pash actually just got on TV and lied [about financial statements and proposals]. I think it was extremely clever word play by an obviously deceitful man.”

Clark said he wanted to apologize to fans but couldn’t because the players were never even presented with a reasonable deal. “If there’s a way we can play football and not be a victim of robbery, we’ll be out there,” he said. “But we can’t make the owners come to us and give us a fair deal. It’s something that has to be negotiated; it’s going to take some time.”

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy

flippy

03-16-2011, 07:15 AM

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy

I've always liked Ryan. But saying stuff like this is only gonna remind people how weak you are in coverage. Ryan's skills are better suited for SS. And I think we tend to overlook this cause he's such a nice guy.

feltdizz

03-16-2011, 10:56 AM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

ikestops85

03-16-2011, 11:13 AM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

I don't think that is what people are saying Dizz. Clark is attacking owners who have tried to reach an agreement. What offer has the union put on the table? The perception is that the owners have at least tried to settle. Smith has done nothing but act like a hard arse. He is badly losing the public relations battle and in the end that will hurt the players.

Clark will also lose that battle with his approach. He has been playing this game for FREE for the majority of his life. Now he says he is the victim of robbery because he only makes millions. WTF? Go tell that to the local police officer or fireman. These people risk their lives daily and what do they get paid?. How does Clark answer that question?

Sorry Ryan but you chose this profession where you make millions for part time work. At least the owners work at it full time. I have a hard time feeling sorry for you ... not that I feel sorry for the owners either.

By the way. I've heard several players claim that Pash lied but have never heard exactly what he lied about. Does anybody know? Are the players claiming the owners never made the offers Pash was claiming?

Dee Dub

03-16-2011, 11:14 AM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

Problem is, Ryan Clark isn’t really that good of a football player. He has been nothing more than a serviceable guy. In fact at his position (free safety), he is a failure in the most important aspect of it……covering. And the teams around the NFL have figured out that this leads to a major weakness in the Steelers….the middle seam.

MeetJoeGreene

03-16-2011, 11:41 AM

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy

Exactly. It is amazing how many people throw irrelavent logical fallacies out there as arguments and how many others lack the critical thinking to see through it.

feltdizz

03-16-2011, 12:04 PM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

Problem is, Ryan Clark isn’t really that good of a football player. He has been nothing more than a serviceable guy. In fact at his position (free safety), he is a failure in the most important aspect of it……covering. And the teams around the NFL have figured out that this leads to a major weakness in the Steelers….the middle seam.

all of our DB's are failures in coverage except for Ike... :wink:

papillon

03-16-2011, 12:17 PM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

Nobody (well, me) said he had to kiss the owners @$$; however, if you're going to debate the CBA and how to go about creating a new one via negotiation don't enter a Red Herring into the debate. The Rooneys owning the Steelers and the Maras owning the Giants through original purchase and then passed down generation by generation is completely irrelevant to negotiating a CBA. The fact that the Rooneys are billionaires is irrelevant; they're running a for profit business and their personal wealth is theirs and shouldn't have any bearing on the negotiations. The facts that are relevant are the revenues generated by the Pittsburgh Steelers, the expenses incurred by the Pittsburgh Steelers and how to go about maximizing the revenue and limiting the expense. Personal wealth, the business being handed down, race tracks in Florida and New York are not relevant in the discussion.

So, the Rooneys own the Steelers, big deal, the Maras own the Giants, great and the two sides are closer to a deal, how? Not to mention that over the years the Maras and the Rooneys have been known as player friendly owners, I'm not sure how alienating the people that write the pay checks is beneficial, but the first amendment provides Ryan Clark that opportunity and he used it.

The speech is free; the response to the speech may not be free, we'll see how the next 5-6 months play out.

Pappy

feltdizz

03-16-2011, 12:18 PM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

I don't think that is what people are saying Dizz. Clark is attacking owners who have tried to reach an agreement. What offer has the union put on the table? The perception is that the owners have at least tried to settle. Smith has done nothing but act like a hard arse. He is badly losing the public relations battle and in the end that will hurt the players.

Clark will also lose that battle with his approach. He has been playing this game for FREE for the majority of his life. Now he says he is the victim of robbery because he only makes millions. WTF? Go tell that to the local police officer or fireman. These people risk their lives daily and what do they get paid?. How does Clark answer that question?

Sorry Ryan but you chose this profession where you make millions for part time work. At least the owners work at it full time. I have a hard time feeling sorry for you ... not that I feel sorry for the owners either.

By the way. I've heard several players claim that Pash lied but have never heard exactly what he lied about. Does anybody know? Are the players claiming the owners never made the offers Pash was claiming?

Police and Fireman? Gimme a break. Don't try to pull on the strings of hearts with that tired argument.

We are talking about Hundred Thousandaires and Millionaires arguing with Billionaires over 100's of Billions of dollars.

NFL football is a year round gig too... some are gifted enough to take a month or 2 off but most work on their craft year round.

feltdizz

03-16-2011, 12:21 PM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

Nobody (well, me) said he had to kiss the owners @$$; however, if you're going to debate the CBA and how to go about creating a new one via negotiation don't enter a Red Herring into the debate. The Rooneys owning the Steelers and the Maras owning the Giants through original purchase and then passed down generation by generation is completely irrelevant to negotiating a CBA. The fact that the Rooneys are billionaires is irrelevant; they're running a for profit business and their personal wealth is theirs and shouldn't have any bearing on the negotiations. The facts that are relevant are the revenues generated by the Pittsburgh Steelers, the expenses incurred by the Pittsburgh Steelers and how to go about maximizing the revenue and limiting the expense. Personal wealth, the business being handed down, race tracks in Florida and New York are not relevant in the discussion.

So, the Rooneys own the Steelers, big deal, the Maras own the Giants, great and the two sides are closer to a deal, how? Not to mention that over the years the Maras and the Rooneys have been known as player friendly owners, I'm not sure how alienating the people that write the pay checks is beneficial, but the first amendment provides Ryan Clark that opportunity and he used it.

The speech is free; the response to the speech may not be free, we'll see how the next 5-6 months play out.

Pappy

I hear you... but can the same be applied for the Millions the players make that we talk about all the time? It's theirs, they worked for it but for some reason people talk about the players money like it was a gift. It's their job and they do it well.... or good enough to get paid a nice amount of cash.

papillon

03-16-2011, 12:33 PM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

Nobody (well, me) said he had to kiss the owners @$$; however, if you're going to debate the CBA and how to go about creating a new one via negotiation don't enter a Red Herring into the debate. The Rooneys owning the Steelers and the Maras owning the Giants through original purchase and then passed down generation by generation is completely irrelevant to negotiating a CBA. The fact that the Rooneys are billionaires is irrelevant; they're running a for profit business and their personal wealth is theirs and shouldn't have any bearing on the negotiations. The facts that are relevant are the revenues generated by the Pittsburgh Steelers, the expenses incurred by the Pittsburgh Steelers and how to go about maximizing the revenue and limiting the expense. Personal wealth, the business being handed down, race tracks in Florida and New York are not relevant in the discussion.

So, the Rooneys own the Steelers, big deal, the Maras own the Giants, great and the two sides are closer to a deal, how? Not to mention that over the years the Maras and the Rooneys have been known as player friendly owners, I'm not sure how alienating the people that write the pay checks is beneficial, but the first amendment provides Ryan Clark that opportunity and he used it.

The speech is free; the response to the speech may not be free, we'll see how the next 5-6 months play out.

Pappy

I hear you... but can the same be applied for the Millions the players make that we talk about all the time? It's theirs, they worked for it but for some reason people talk about the players money like it was a gift. It's their job and they do it well.... or good enough to get paid a nice amount of cash.

I don't begrudge the players one penny of what they make; if I could do it, I would in a minute. The players will get their opportunity to pass on their wealth to their heirs the same as the owners. And, when they do that, no one should care, they made the investment in themselves and it paid off for their families.

I just don't believe that the rhetoric Ryan Clark threw out there yesterday is going to help the players case and, in particular, when those owners being chastised are known to be player friendly.

It certainly wouldn't sit well with me if I were part of the front office of the Steelers and/or a member of the Rooney family and I heard those comments. My next call would have been to Kevin Colbert.

Pappy

Oviedo

03-16-2011, 12:41 PM

Ryan Clark = Disposable Carbon Unit

Bye!!!!!!!!!!

Oviedo

03-16-2011, 12:44 PM

Shut up Clark! Play the game and shut your trap. How dare you give an opinion that doesn't kiss the owners azzz.

Nobody (well, me) said he had to kiss the owners @$$; however, if you're going to debate the CBA and how to go about creating a new one via negotiation don't enter a Red Herring into the debate. The Rooneys owning the Steelers and the Maras owning the Giants through original purchase and then passed down generation by generation is completely irrelevant to negotiating a CBA. The fact that the Rooneys are billionaires is irrelevant; they're running a for profit business and their personal wealth is theirs and shouldn't have any bearing on the negotiations. The facts that are relevant are the revenues generated by the Pittsburgh Steelers, the expenses incurred by the Pittsburgh Steelers and how to go about maximizing the revenue and limiting the expense. Personal wealth, the business being handed down, race tracks in Florida and New York are not relevant in the discussion.

So, the Rooneys own the Steelers, big deal, the Maras own the Giants, great and the two sides are closer to a deal, how? Not to mention that over the years the Maras and the Rooneys have been known as player friendly owners, I'm not sure how alienating the people that write the pay checks is beneficial, but the first amendment provides Ryan Clark that opportunity and he used it.

The speech is free; the response to the speech may not be free, we'll see how the next 5-6 months play out.

Pappy

Like I tell my kids "You can control the choices you make, but you rarely have control over the consequences of those choices"

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 01:25 PM

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy
I'm sorry to say this, but it is important. Many players TRY to start businesses that fail. Not because they're bad business men or bad people, they just may get into the wrong business at the wrong time. Dirt filed for bankruptcy because he got into business that failed. Meanwhile, Paul Allen the owner of the Seahawks is the 2nd richest man in the world, behind bill gates. The Rooneys generate money that is inconceivable. 16 of the 100 richest men in the world own professional football teams. That's a big difference. I respect what Clark is saying. when he's ARII's age, he'll be a broken down old man that made the Rooney family richer at the risk to his own body.

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 01:25 PM

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy
I'm sorry to say this, but it is important. Many players TRY to start businesses that fail. Not because they're bad business men or bad people, they just may get into the wrong business at the wrong time. Dirt filed for bankruptcy because he got into business that failed. Meanwhile, Paul Allen the owner of the Seahawks is the 2nd richest man in the world, behind bill gates. The Rooneys generate money that is inconceivable. 16 of the 100 richest men in the world own professional football teams. That's a big difference. I respect what Clark is saying. when he's ARII's age, he'll be a broken down old man that made the Rooney family richer at the risk to his own body.

Oviedo

03-16-2011, 01:50 PM

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy

I'm sorry to say this, but it is important. Many players TRY to start businesses that fail. Not because they're bad business men or bad people, they just may get into the wrong business at the wrong time. Dirt filed for bankruptcy because he got into business that failed. Meanwhile, Paul Allen the owner of the Seahawks is the 2nd richest man in the world, behind bill gates. The Rooneys generate money that is inconceivable. 16 of the 100 richest men in the world own professional football teams. That's a big difference. I respect what Clark is saying. when he's ARII's age, he'll be a broken down old man that made the Rooney family richer at the risk to his own body.

Paul Allen, Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder, etc didn't make their money through their football teams. That is the difference between them and owners like the Rooneys and the Mara. The Rooneys and the Maras wealth is a result of 80 years of appreciation in the value of the teams. They were NOT immediate millionaires. They worked to grow the businessa dn therefore their investment...no immediate gratification. Oh, and they dealt with little things like a Depression and a World War.

They do not have the huge outside of the the NFL wealth resources that the billionaire owners have. That is why it is so important that the NFL does not become MLB where billionaire owners and large markets create a wealth distortion that leaves half the league non competitive.

I really doubt the Rooneys are billionaires, not doubt they are multi millionaires many times only but that is the result of an investment of $2,500 that "The Chief" made in 1933.

Because of the NFL "Whining Ryan Clark" will have significantly more money than that to invest in a business and if his family are decent businessmen in 80 years he could possibly be a multi millionaire too. The problem is that idiots like Clark think they should have it all right now because as football players they have been given everything since they were 12 yesars old. Clark got a free college education. He will have millions in the bank to start a business and invest. That is more than anything the Rooneys ever started with.

Want to see an example of the problem-look at Dan Rooney's house and then look at Ryan Clarks. Dan lives in the same house as his dad. Clark probably has bought a 5000 square foot estate just because he could. And then he'll complain he has no money 10 years from now.

Northern_Blitz

03-16-2011, 01:53 PM

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy
I'm sorry to say this, but it is important. Many players TRY to start businesses that fail. Not because they're bad business men or bad people, they just may get into the wrong business at the wrong time. Dirt filed for bankruptcy because he got into business that failed. Meanwhile, Paul Allen the owner of the Seahawks is the 2nd richest man in the world, behind bill gates. The Rooneys generate money that is inconceivable. 16 of the 100 richest men in the world own professional football teams. That's a big difference. I respect what Clark is saying. when he's ARII's age, he'll be a broken down old man that made the Rooney family richer at the risk to his own body.

By his own choice. And his sacrifice of longevity should leave his kids and his kids kids
set for life, not to mention likely increasing his own quality of life in the bargain. Not only that, but the publicity they get for being in the NFL leads many players on to prosperity after they retire. I'd imagine that even unknown guys end up getting jobs that are better than their qualifications because they worked in the NFL.

If you don't think this is the case: when was the last time any one of these kids turned down an NFL contract in favour of another gig they could have gotten without the NFL? Pat Tillman is the only guy I can think of, and he is clearly a very special case.

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 02:16 PM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 02:24 PM

Clark is normally a sensible guy, but this isn't going to sit well on Rooney Circle. The fact that the Steelers have been owned by the Rooneys and the team has been passed down from Art to Dan and now to Art II is irrelevant. If he wants something to pass on to his kids, then I suggest he take some of the millions he's made and start a business, take on debt, make a payroll and turn a profit; then turn it over to Jordan to run after he retires.

The players believe that because they get beat up earning a living that they are owed something. They are owed nothing by the owners or the NFL; they know the physical abuse their bodies take going in and going after the legacy owners like the Maras and Rooneys for passing their teams down through their families is a weak argument.

Rahim Moore is looking better and better to the front office with these statements.

Pappy
I'm sorry to say this, but it is important. Many players TRY to start businesses that fail. Not because they're bad business men or bad people, they just may get into the wrong business at the wrong time. Dirt filed for bankruptcy because he got into business that failed. Meanwhile, Paul Allen the owner of the Seahawks is the 2nd richest man in the world, behind bill gates. The Rooneys generate money that is inconceivable. 16 of the 100 richest men in the world own professional football teams. That's a big difference. I respect what Clark is saying. when he's ARII's age, he'll be a broken down old man that made the Rooney family richer at the risk to his own body.

By his own choice. And his sacrifice of longevity should leave his kids and his kids kids
set for life, not to mention likely increasing his own quality of life in the bargain. Not only that, but the publicity they get for being in the NFL leads many players on to prosperity after they retire. I'd imagine that even unknown guys end up getting jobs that are better than their qualifications because they worked in the NFL.

If you don't think this is the case: when was the last time any one of these kids turned down an NFL contract in favour of another gig they could have gotten without the NFL? Pat Tillman is the only guy I can think of, and he is clearly a very special case.
that's not the point man.. how a guy who makes more money than some countries can complain about losing money when he puts NOTHING on the line is ridiculous.

Oviedo

03-16-2011, 02:31 PM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Sacrificing their bodies by choice. No one forces them to take milions of dollars to play a game. Guys like Ryan Clark could have used that FREE education he got and started a business of his own. I bet if he did own his own business he would be singing a different tune.

Zero sympathy for the players. I never asked for anyone to feel sorry for me during my 20 years in the Army and I know I didn't get paid millions. It was my choice. If you don't like your choice or the consequences of your choice GET OUT!!!!!!!!! If you feel it is dangerous...QUIT and use your education and get a job.

papillon

03-16-2011, 02:49 PM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Paul Allen doesn't have anything to do with this debate or how he obtained his billions. He didn't have to beat his head against 300 pound lineman to make his billions he used an idea and his intelligence. The fact that he now chooses to invest some of the money he made in the Seahawks in an attempt to earn more money is irrelevant. He will run the Seahawks as a separate entity from his other endeavors and vice versa.

The owners can complain about losing money in the business of football and that's all that should be taken into account. Just because they can afford to have their team go belly up and still be wealthy is irrelevant. They're businessmen and are in the football business to make as much money as they can.

They have a safety net now, but when Paul Allen and Bill gates were in Bill's garage determining how they were going to extract the DOS operating system out from under IBM they were taking a huge risk. Bill Gates managed to negotiate DOS from IBM, because IBM couldn't imagine why any one person would want a computer in their house and Bill Gates and Paul Allen had a vision and an idea. They took IBM to the woodshed.

The players are risking their bodies on their own accord to try and make as much money as they can. They, too, can make enough to set up their children, so that, they don't have to work a day in their life, but many live in the moment and forsake the future.

Think about this if you worked for 40 years and made 100,000/year which is a pretty good living (and, you aren't earning that scratch out of college) during your working life you will have earned $4,000,000 and on this 4 million dollars you raised a family, sent the kids to college and retired. Many athletes earn that in one year. Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

The owners wealth outside of football doesn't have anything to do with the current impasse between the owners and players. It's football business and football business only.

Pappy

Oviedo

03-16-2011, 03:16 PM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Paul Allen doesn't have anything to do with this debate or how he obtained his billions. He didn't have to beat his head against 300 pound lineman to make his billions he used an idea and his intelligence. The fact that he now chooses to invest some of the money he made in the Seahawks in an attempt to earn more money is irrelevant. He will run the Seahawks as a separate entity from his other endeavors and vice versa.

The owners can complain about losing money in the business of football and that's all that should be taken into account. Just because they can afford to have their team go belly up and still be wealthy is irrelevant. They're businessmen and are in the football business to make as much money as they can.

They have a safety net now, but when Paul Allen and Bill gates were in Bill's garage determining how they were going to extract the DOS operating system out from under IBM they were taking a huge risk. Bill Gates managed to negotiate DOS from IBM, because IBM couldn't imagine why any one person would want a computer in their house and Bill Gates and Paul Allen had a vision and an idea. They took IBM to the woodshed.

The players are risking their bodies on their own accord to try and make as much money as they can. They, too, can make enough to set up their children, so that, they don't have to work a day in their life, but many live in the moment and forsake the future.

Think about this if you worked for 40 years and made 100,000/year which is a pretty good living (and, you aren't earning that scratch out of college) during your working life you will have earned $4,000,000 and on this 4 million dollars you raised a family, sent the kids to college and retired. Many athletes earn that in one year. Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

The owners wealth outside of football doesn't have anything to do with the current impasse between the owners and players. It's football business and football business only.

Pappy

:Clap :Clap :Clap Wisdom!!!!!

feltdizz

03-16-2011, 03:57 PM

Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

Pappy

Probably because most owners didn't go from dirt poor to millionaires overnight at the age of 25.

eniparadoxgma

03-16-2011, 04:00 PM

Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

Pappy

Probably because most owners didn't go from dirt poor to millionaires overnight at the age of 25.

The horror.

ikestops85

03-16-2011, 04:14 PM

Police and Fireman? Gimme a break. Don't try to pull on the strings of hearts with that tired argument.

We are talking about Hundred Thousandaires and Millionaires arguing with Billionaires over 100's of Billions of dollars.

NFL football is a year round gig too... some are gifted enough to take a month or 2 off but most work on their craft year round.

I'm not pulling on heart strings. Policeman and Fireman choose to go into their profession and get paid little compared to life and limb that they risk. However, they choose to do that. The same with football players. Except they choose to go into a profession which offers them the ability to set up their families for life. Their are no guarantees. Players can get cut and owners can lose money.

Right now football is in good shape but if you look at the history of the league teams have come and gone because owners couldn't afford to run them. In the early days of the Steelers "The Chief" was happy if the team broke even. They often lost money. It wasn't until Dan started to run things that they regularly turned a profit.

The economy right now is horrible. How many games were not sold out this past year? How many were sold out due to a white knight who bought up the remaining tickets? The owners are on the hook for all the operating expenses and if the next TV deal provides less revenue, which many financial experts are forecasting, the owners are going to start to have a problem.

Wasn't it only a few years ago that the Rooney's said they need a new stadium to be able to compete? That they couldn't generate the revenue they needed without additional luxury boxes and such things? Do you think they lied about this?

Oviedo

03-16-2011, 04:18 PM

Police and Fireman? Gimme a break. Don't try to pull on the strings of hearts with that tired argument.

We are talking about Hundred Thousandaires and Millionaires arguing with Billionaires over 100's of Billions of dollars.

NFL football is a year round gig too... some are gifted enough to take a month or 2 off but most work on their craft year round.

I'm not pulling on heart strings. Policeman and Fireman choose to go into their profession and get paid little compared to life and limb that they risk. However, they choose to do that. The same with football players. Except they choose to go into a profession which offers them the ability to set up their families for life. Their are no guarantees. Players can get cut and owners can lose money.

Right now football is in good shape but if you look at the history of the league teams have come and gone because owners couldn't afford to run them. In the early days of the Steelers "The Chief" was happy if the team broke even. They often lost money. It wasn't until Dan started to run things that they regularly turned a profit.

The economy right now is horrible. How many games were not sold out this past year? How many were sold out due to a white knight who bought up the remaining tickets? The owners are on the hook for all the operating expenses and if the next TV deal provides less revenue, which many financial experts are forecasting, the owners are going to start to have a problem.

Wasn't it only a few years ago that the Rooney's said they need a new stadium to be able to compete? That they couldn't generate the revenue they needed without additional luxury boxes and such things? Do you think they lied about this?

Like I said earlier and in other threads. When they are talking who do you think is lying Art Rooney or De Smith? I trust the Rooneys 1000% more than that idiot Smith.

feltdizz

03-16-2011, 05:43 PM

Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

Pappy

Probably because most owners didn't go from dirt poor to millionaires overnight at the age of 25.

The horror.
The reality.

flippy

03-16-2011, 06:12 PM

Are you even sure Clark grew up poor?

Besides, in Clark's defense, he's a pretty smart guy with a bright potential future as a commentator after football.

He's typically one of the great guys in the NFL. And I suspect some emotion got him to say something he didn't mean to say if he would have thought about it.

Chadman

03-16-2011, 06:19 PM

Ok, everybody just breathe...we're all friends here... :)

This whole labour dispute is certainly upping the temperature guage for everyone.

A couple of observations from Chadman-

1. Given that the labour dispute is quite an emotional thing for all involved, it is probably not a prudent move from a player like Ryan Clark to not only critisise the owners in general, but also to single out his own employer like that. That surely can't sit well with the guys that write his pay cheques. Particularly when you remember that with his health issues, the Steelers could easily have let Clark go & found a less health-risk option, but instead decided to stick with 'their guy' through what was potentially a performance reducing injury.

2. To assume it is 'ok' for a wealthy businessman to lose millions/billions due to changed financial constraints, but not expect the same to apply to the players, is a little one-sided. The owners, by the way, have not said to anyone that the current contracts that players are signed to are going to be reduced. So far as Chadman can figure, no player will 'lose' money or be 'robbed' as they are claiming. It just means that FA's from here on will not get the same sized pie to take their cut from. It's still very possible that the Ryan Clarks will be able to sign their $2 million dollar deals under the owners proposal. The guys most likely to be affected are the over priced back-ups...maybe Chris Hoke will have to earn $1 million instead of $2.5 million in the future?

3. The NFL & it's players need the owners to make mony. If they don't- if owning a franchise isn't profitable IN THE OWNERS EYES, then they'll sell up & find a venture that is profitable. OK- so some will assume that's fine because another billionaire will buy in- not true. New purchasers will baulk at jumping in if they find they can't earn what THEY EXPECT to earn. Franchises losing their profit margin can only lead to long term problems, and regardless of if the consequences hit now or in 10 years, the players will feel the pinch.

4. The Owners are not LOSING MONEY. this is a misconception, and it has never been the Owners point during the labour dispute. What they are arguing is that rising costs are lowering their profit margin, or their percentage of profit. The argument that the Owners are losing money is inaccurate- they are losing their earning capacity. Chadman wonders if this point has been overlooked by the NFLPA on purpose in order to generate the "Owners are lying about losing money" propeganda?

5. Negotiation is a 2-way street. The players are only taking here & not offering anything back. While that goes on, there is no chance of an agreement.

6. The players need to know one thing- if the NFL shuts down, if the owners just put up their hands & say "Too hard" & walk away (unlikely, yes), the players are the ones up the creek without paddle. The owners will still make billions in other investments. The players will have to find work that pays something similar to the NFL. Good luck with that. While the players might want to fight this to the end, it might be in their best interests to find the best DEAL that keeps them employed.

7. To say the Owners risk nothing while the players risk all is inaccurate. The Owners risk their money, the thing everyone is arguing over, on every player, training venue, club house, jersey, employee, stadium, helmet, can of coke etc. There is no written guarentee they will make their money back on any of it. They risk a lot of their own livelyhood. Yes, the players risk their bodies & health. For a game. That they enjoy. How many of us would risk our bodies to be NFL players? Chadman would! But would you invest 50% of your wealth on anything like these owners do?

I can't believe that normally rational people are taking sides in this argument. The integrity on the whole of both sides has been diminished by this multi-billion dollar spat, in my opinion.

However, the idea that the players will NOT receive less money is a fallacy. In the last CBA, owners were given $1 billion of the NFL revenue pie before the players were considered. Now the owners have asked for $2 billion off the top. The owners are asking the players to take a worse deal than previously negotiated. Apparently, the players were willing to entertain this, but asked to see the owners' finances in order to verify that the owners were negotiating in good faith. The owners did not provide the documentation as the players asked, therefore negotiations fell apart.

To say that the players offered nothing isn't exactly true. The owners are asking them to take a lesser deal than they already had.

Neither the players nor the owners are saints in this. IMO, they are both equally greedy and the respect-o-meter has dipped for both sides.

Chadman

03-16-2011, 07:16 PM

Slapstick probably has the best read on the whole thing, all things considered...

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 07:28 PM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Sacrificing their bodies by choice. No one forces them to take milions of dollars to play a game. Guys like Ryan Clark could have used that FREE education he got and started a business of his own. I bet if he did own his own business he would be singing a different tune.

Zero sympathy for the players. I never asked for anyone to feel sorry for me during my 20 years in the Army and I know I didn't get paid millions. It was my choice. If you don't like your choice or the consequences of your choice GET OUT!!!!!!!!! If you feel it is dangerous...QUIT and use your education and get a job.
Yea no sympathy for the guys whose brains are mashed patotoes by the end of their career. guys who have had 29 surgeries, like mark schlereth. Guys who are so brain damaged they end up homeless and dead like Mike Webster. All to play a game they love. while the rich billionaire who gets handed his fortune by his daddy can make more money. get real man. that may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard ANYONE say.

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 07:30 PM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Paul Allen doesn't have anything to do with this debate or how he obtained his billions. He didn't have to beat his head against 300 pound lineman to make his billions he used an idea and his intelligence. The fact that he now chooses to invest some of the money he made in the Seahawks in an attempt to earn more money is irrelevant. He will run the Seahawks as a separate entity from his other endeavors and vice versa.

The owners can complain about losing money in the business of football and that's all that should be taken into account. Just because they can afford to have their team go belly up and still be wealthy is irrelevant. They're businessmen and are in the football business to make as much money as they can.

They have a safety net now, but when Paul Allen and Bill gates were in Bill's garage determining how they were going to extract the DOS operating system out from under IBM they were taking a huge risk. Bill Gates managed to negotiate DOS from IBM, because IBM couldn't imagine why any one person would want a computer in their house and Bill Gates and Paul Allen had a vision and an idea. They took IBM to the woodshed.

The players are risking their bodies on their own accord to try and make as much money as they can. They, too, can make enough to set up their children, so that, they don't have to work a day in their life, but many live in the moment and forsake the future.

Think about this if you worked for 40 years and made 100,000/year which is a pretty good living (and, you aren't earning that scratch out of college) during your working life you will have earned $4,000,000 and on this 4 million dollars you raised a family, sent the kids to college and retired. Many athletes earn that in one year. Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

The owners wealth outside of football doesn't have anything to do with the current impasse between the owners and players. It's football business and football business only.

Pappy
Pappy, normally you say intelligent things... what happened?

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 07:31 PM

Police and Fireman? Gimme a break. Don't try to pull on the strings of hearts with that tired argument.

We are talking about Hundred Thousandaires and Millionaires arguing with Billionaires over 100's of Billions of dollars.

NFL football is a year round gig too... some are gifted enough to take a month or 2 off but most work on their craft year round.

I'm not pulling on heart strings. Policeman and Fireman choose to go into their profession and get paid little compared to life and limb that they risk. However, they choose to do that. The same with football players. Except they choose to go into a profession which offers them the ability to set up their families for life. Their are no guarantees. Players can get cut and owners can lose money.

Right now football is in good shape but if you look at the history of the league teams have come and gone because owners couldn't afford to run them. In the early days of the Steelers "The Chief" was happy if the team broke even. They often lost money. It wasn't until Dan started to run things that they regularly turned a profit.

The economy right now is horrible. How many games were not sold out this past year? How many were sold out due to a white knight who bought up the remaining tickets? The owners are on the hook for all the operating expenses and if the next TV deal provides less revenue, which many financial experts are forecasting, the owners are going to start to have a problem.

Wasn't it only a few years ago that the Rooney's said they need a new stadium to be able to compete? That they couldn't generate the revenue they needed without additional luxury boxes and such things? Do you think they lied about this?

Like I said earlier and in other threads. When they are talking who do you think is lying Art Rooney or De Smith? I trust the Rooneys 1000% more than that idiot Smith.
someone once told me.. if you want to find the guilty party, follow the money. for every owner like the rooneys you have two dan snyders, a bob nutting and a jerry jones.

Chadman

03-16-2011, 07:33 PM

There are always two sides to every story, and no doubt we only hear what both parties & the media WANT us to haer.

To say anybody is absolutely wrong due to their opinion is overlooking the other side of the argument.

Does ANYBODY here know the full story, from both sides?

birtikidis

03-16-2011, 07:35 PM

Wow.

I can't believe that normally rational people are taking sides in this argument. The integrity on the whole of both sides has been diminished by this multi-billion dollar spat, in my opinion.

However, the idea that the players will NOT receive less money is a fallacy. In the last CBA, owners were given $1 billion of the NFL revenue pie before the players were considered. Now the owners have asked for $2 billion off the top. The owners are asking the players to take a worse deal than previously negotiated. Apparently, the players were willing to entertain this, but asked to see the owners' finances in order to verify that the owners were negotiating in good faith. The owners did not provide the documentation as the players asked, therefore negotiations fell apart.

To say that the players offered nothing isn't exactly true. The owners are asking them to take a lesser deal than they already had.

Neither the players nor the owners are saints in this. IMO, they are both equally greedy and the respect-o-meter has dipped for both sides.
I just don't feel bad for multi billioinaires who are handed everything for their entire life. I tend to side with the guys who do the work to make the business profitable. but I completely agree, the big picture, they're both acting like morons.

feltdizz

03-17-2011, 12:09 AM

Never trust Billionaires who say they are losing money...

Billionaires will always cry broke, it's how they stay rich.

papillon

03-17-2011, 12:11 AM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Paul Allen doesn't have anything to do with this debate or how he obtained his billions. He didn't have to beat his head against 300 pound lineman to make his billions he used an idea and his intelligence. The fact that he now chooses to invest some of the money he made in the Seahawks in an attempt to earn more money is irrelevant. He will run the Seahawks as a separate entity from his other endeavors and vice versa.

The owners can complain about losing money in the business of football and that's all that should be taken into account. Just because they can afford to have their team go belly up and still be wealthy is irrelevant. They're businessmen and are in the football business to make as much money as they can.

They have a safety net now, but when Paul Allen and Bill gates were in Bill's garage determining how they were going to extract the DOS operating system out from under IBM they were taking a huge risk. Bill Gates managed to negotiate DOS from IBM, because IBM couldn't imagine why any one person would want a computer in their house and Bill Gates and Paul Allen had a vision and an idea. They took IBM to the woodshed.

The players are risking their bodies on their own accord to try and make as much money as they can. They, too, can make enough to set up their children, so that, they don't have to work a day in their life, but many live in the moment and forsake the future.

Think about this if you worked for 40 years and made 100,000/year which is a pretty good living (and, you aren't earning that scratch out of college) during your working life you will have earned $4,000,000 and on this 4 million dollars you raised a family, sent the kids to college and retired. Many athletes earn that in one year. Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

The owners wealth outside of football doesn't have anything to do with the current impasse between the owners and players. It's football business and football business only.

Pappy
Pappy, normally you say intelligent things... what happened?

Please explain the part that isn't intelligent or logical and I'll let you know what happened.

Pappy

Chadman

03-17-2011, 02:45 AM

Getting snippy in your old age Pap?

Let's all try to not get personal about this guys...we all know it sucks, we all know both sides should do better. But it's none of our fault, and there's bugger all we can do about it anyway.

One thing is for sure- no matter our opinion, we all agree that we want it sorted out.

Now...Fight! Fight! Fight!! :stirpot :stirpot

birtikidis

03-17-2011, 08:51 AM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Paul Allen doesn't have anything to do with this debate or how he obtained his billions. He didn't have to beat his head against 300 pound lineman to make his billions he used an idea and his intelligence. The fact that he now chooses to invest some of the money he made in the Seahawks in an attempt to earn more money is irrelevant. He will run the Seahawks as a separate entity from his other endeavors and vice versa.

The owners can complain about losing money in the business of football and that's all that should be taken into account. Just because they can afford to have their team go belly up and still be wealthy is irrelevant. They're businessmen and are in the football business to make as much money as they can.

They have a safety net now, but when Paul Allen and Bill gates were in Bill's garage determining how they were going to extract the DOS operating system out from under IBM they were taking a huge risk. Bill Gates managed to negotiate DOS from IBM, because IBM couldn't imagine why any one person would want a computer in their house and Bill Gates and Paul Allen had a vision and an idea. They took IBM to the woodshed.

The players are risking their bodies on their own accord to try and make as much money as they can. They, too, can make enough to set up their children, so that, they don't have to work a day in their life, but many live in the moment and forsake the future.

Think about this if you worked for 40 years and made 100,000/year which is a pretty good living (and, you aren't earning that scratch out of college) during your working life you will have earned $4,000,000 and on this 4 million dollars you raised a family, sent the kids to college and retired. Many athletes earn that in one year. Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

The owners wealth outside of football doesn't have anything to do with the current impasse between the owners and players. It's football business and football business only.

Pappy
Pappy, normally you say intelligent things... what happened?

Please explain the part that isn't intelligent or logical and I'll let you know what happened.

Pappy
sure pap no problem.
1. when you're a conglomerate of companies and resources it does in fact affect the status of the CBA.
2. when you're receiving exemption from anti-trust laws that helped you create that fortune, you're already being treated unfairly (as to say that the average person, NFL player included will not get treated that way). They already have a legal advantage to anyone else in the United States.
3. When you can stash 4 billion dollars away for a rainy day, something tells me that, as a business, you're not in a status of hardship. especially when you can completely suspend operations and MAKE money for one entire year.
4. I had to explain this to a student once. His cousin was just drafted by the Buffalo Bills in the first round. He always asked why CJ didn't make as much as he thought he would (the student thought he'd make a ton of money right away). I had to explain to him that after taxes, management fees, agent fees, and all the other fees that an athlete must pay right off the top, they're not making what you think they are. THat huge million dollar salary, that a small percentage of these guys actually make is taxed all to hell, divied up among his legal team, and comes out to a much smaller number then anyone else would think.

Oviedo

03-17-2011, 09:32 AM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Sacrificing their bodies by choice. No one forces them to take milions of dollars to play a game. Guys like Ryan Clark could have used that FREE education he got and started a business of his own. I bet if he did own his own business he would be singing a different tune.

Zero sympathy for the players. I never asked for anyone to feel sorry for me during my 20 years in the Army and I know I didn't get paid millions. It was my choice. If you don't like your choice or the consequences of your choice GET OUT!!!!!!!!! If you feel it is dangerous...QUIT and use your education and get a job.
Yea no sympathy for the guys whose brains are mashed patotoes by the end of their career. guys who have had 29 surgeries, like mark schlereth. Guys who are so brain damaged they end up homeless and dead like Mike Webster. All to play a game they love. while the rich billionaire who gets handed his fortune by his daddy can make more money. get real man. that may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard ANYONE say.

You are right, I have zero sympathy for them for the results of them doing what they have claimed they love to do and what has made them better money than most professions. Don't like to see it but I don't feel sorry for them anymore than they feel sorry for people in any other dangerous profession who gets work. Football is not the only dangerous job there is but it is probably at the top of the payscale.

The DUMBEST thing is someone feeling sorry for a millionaire who is doing exactly what he chooses to do because he works for a billionaire. Think any of these players you feel you need to be the protector of would put this much intellectual energy worrying about you or me. If you believe that then that is truly DUMB.

steelblood

03-17-2011, 09:47 AM

Wow.

I can't believe that normally rational people are taking sides in this argument. The integrity on the whole of both sides has been diminished by this multi-billion dollar spat, in my opinion.

However, the idea that the players will NOT receive less money is a fallacy. In the last CBA, owners were given $1 billion of the NFL revenue pie before the players were considered. Now the owners have asked for $2 billion off the top. The owners are asking the players to take a worse deal than previously negotiated. Apparently, the players were willing to entertain this, but asked to see the owners' finances in order to verify that the owners were negotiating in good faith. The owners did not provide the documentation as the players asked, therefore negotiations fell apart.

To say that the players offered nothing isn't exactly true. The owners are asking them to take a lesser deal than they already had.

Neither the players nor the owners are saints in this. IMO, they are both equally greedy and the respect-o-meter has dipped for both sides.
I just don't feel bad for multi billioinaires who are handed everything for their entire life. I tend to side with the guys who do the work to make the business profitable. but I completely agree, the big picture, they're both acting like morons.

I don't empathize with either party. They are both spoiled by the success of the league. NFL players and owners toiled for 80 years to grow this league into the most exciting sport on the planet. And now, their greed threatens to destroy it.

birtikidis

03-17-2011, 09:48 AM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Sacrificing their bodies by choice. No one forces them to take milions of dollars to play a game. Guys like Ryan Clark could have used that FREE education he got and started a business of his own. I bet if he did own his own business he would be singing a different tune.

Zero sympathy for the players. I never asked for anyone to feel sorry for me during my 20 years in the Army and I know I didn't get paid millions. It was my choice. If you don't like your choice or the consequences of your choice GET OUT!!!!!!!!! If you feel it is dangerous...QUIT and use your education and get a job.
Yea no sympathy for the guys whose brains are mashed patotoes by the end of their career. guys who have had 29 surgeries, like mark schlereth. Guys who are so brain damaged they end up homeless and dead like Mike Webster. All to play a game they love. while the rich billionaire who gets handed his fortune by his daddy can make more money. get real man. that may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard ANYONE say.

You are right, I have zero sympathy for them for the results of them doing what they have claimed they love to do and what has made them better money than most professions. Don't like to see it but I don't feel sorry for them anymore than they feel sorry for people in any other dangerous profession who gets work. Football is not the only dangerous job there is but it is probably at the top of the payscale.

The DUMBEST thing is someone feeling sorry for a millionaire who is doing exactly what he chooses to do because he works for a billionaire. Think any of these players you feel you need to be the protector of would put this much intellectual energy worrying about you or me. If you believe that then that is truly DUMB.
Ovi, I see your point. and I DO agree with you. Like i posted earlier about Chad Johnson, they're both being bastards. I just get p!ssed that the guys with the Anti Trust exemption that no one else in this country, including the players, will ever get is extremely annoying to me. Those guys have the deck stacked in their favor. from birth. and in every aspect. for them to complain about money is ludicrous to me.

ikestops85

03-17-2011, 10:55 AM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Sacrificing their bodies by choice. No one forces them to take milions of dollars to play a game. Guys like Ryan Clark could have used that FREE education he got and started a business of his own. I bet if he did own his own business he would be singing a different tune.

Zero sympathy for the players. I never asked for anyone to feel sorry for me during my 20 years in the Army and I know I didn't get paid millions. It was my choice. If you don't like your choice or the consequences of your choice GET OUT!!!!!!!!! If you feel it is dangerous...QUIT and use your education and get a job.
Yea no sympathy for the guys whose brains are mashed patotoes by the end of their career. guys who have had 29 surgeries, like mark schlereth. Guys who are so brain damaged they end up homeless and dead like Mike Webster. All to play a game they love. while the rich billionaire who gets handed his fortune by his daddy can make more money. get real man. that may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard ANYONE say.

You are right, I have zero sympathy for them for the results of them doing what they have claimed they love to do and what has made them better money than most professions. Don't like to see it but I don't feel sorry for them anymore than they feel sorry for people in any other dangerous profession who gets work. Football is not the only dangerous job there is but it is probably at the top of the payscale.

The DUMBEST thing is someone feeling sorry for a millionaire who is doing exactly what he chooses to do because he works for a billionaire. Think any of these players you feel you need to be the protector of would put this much intellectual energy worrying about you or me. If you believe that then that is truly DUMB.
Ovi, I see your point. and I DO agree with you. Like i posted earlier about Chad Johnson, they're both being bastards. I just get p!ssed that the guys with the Anti Trust exemption that no one else in this country, including the players, will ever get is extremely annoying to me. Those guys have the deck stacked in their favor. from birth. and in every aspect. for them to complain about money is ludicrous to me.

I really don't know the answer to this but it would be interesting if someone does. How many owners were born with the perverbial silver spoon in their mouth? I know that Dan Rooney wasn't. The Chief referred to it as "putting on the dog" and he despised people who flaunted wealth. He made sure his boys had to work for what they got. Does anybody know about the other owners?

feltdizz

03-17-2011, 11:44 AM

The DUMBEST thing is someone feeling sorry for a millionaire who is doing exactly what he chooses to do because he works for a billionaire. Think any of these players you feel you need to be the protector of would put this much intellectual energy worrying about you or me. If you believe that then that is truly DUMB.

same argument can be said for those who spend time defending the billionaires. :stirpot

ikestops85

03-17-2011, 12:28 PM

The DUMBEST thing is someone feeling sorry for a millionaire who is doing exactly what he chooses to do because he works for a billionaire. Think any of these players you feel you need to be the protector of would put this much intellectual energy worrying about you or me. If you believe that then that is truly DUMB.

same argument can be said for those who spend time defending the billionaires. :stirpot

I don't think anyone can argue with this. Billionaires ... millionaires, I can't feel sorry for either of them.

birtikidis

03-17-2011, 01:03 PM

I'm sorry, Dan Rooney definitely was born with a silver spoon lol. just because he was taught to respect the value of money and hard work, doesn't mean he wasn't rich as hell.

papillon

03-17-2011, 02:49 PM

It doesn't matter how they got their wealth. THEY weren't the ones sacraficing their bodies to make the owners money. Paul Allens children WILL NEVER HAVE TO DO ANYTHING EVER. The point is that those owners can't complain about losing money when they're among the richest people in the world. I mean come on get real already.

Paul Allen doesn't have anything to do with this debate or how he obtained his billions. He didn't have to beat his head against 300 pound lineman to make his billions he used an idea and his intelligence. The fact that he now chooses to invest some of the money he made in the Seahawks in an attempt to earn more money is irrelevant. He will run the Seahawks as a separate entity from his other endeavors and vice versa.

The owners can complain about losing money in the business of football and that's all that should be taken into account. Just because they can afford to have their team go belly up and still be wealthy is irrelevant. They're businessmen and are in the football business to make as much money as they can.

They have a safety net now, but when Paul Allen and Bill gates were in Bill's garage determining how they were going to extract the DOS operating system out from under IBM they were taking a huge risk. Bill Gates managed to negotiate DOS from IBM, because IBM couldn't imagine why any one person would want a computer in their house and Bill Gates and Paul Allen had a vision and an idea. They took IBM to the woodshed.

The players are risking their bodies on their own accord to try and make as much money as they can. They, too, can make enough to set up their children, so that, they don't have to work a day in their life, but many live in the moment and forsake the future.

Think about this if you worked for 40 years and made 100,000/year which is a pretty good living (and, you aren't earning that scratch out of college) during your working life you will have earned $4,000,000 and on this 4 million dollars you raised a family, sent the kids to college and retired. Many athletes earn that in one year. Why can't they save and set their children up for life just like the owners?

The answer is they can, but many choose not to.

The owners wealth outside of football doesn't have anything to do with the current impasse between the owners and players. It's football business and football business only.

Pappy
Pappy, normally you say intelligent things... what happened?

Please explain the part that isn't intelligent or logical and I'll let you know what happened.

Pappy
sure pap no problem.
1. when you're a conglomerate of companies and resources it does in fact affect the status of the CBA.
2. when you're receiving exemption from anti-trust laws that helped you create that fortune, you're already being treated unfairly (as to say that the average person, NFL player included will not get treated that way). They already have a legal advantage to anyone else in the United States.
3. When you can stash 4 billion dollars away for a rainy day, something tells me that, as a business, you're not in a status of hardship. especially when you can completely suspend operations and MAKE money for one entire year.
4. I had to explain this to a student once. His cousin was just drafted by the Buffalo Bills in the first round. He always asked why CJ didn't make as much as he thought he would (the student thought he'd make a ton of money right away). I had to explain to him that after taxes, management fees, agent fees, and all the other fees that an athlete must pay right off the top, they're not making what you think they are. THat huge million dollar salary, that a small percentage of these guys actually make is taxed all to hell, divied up among his legal team, and comes out to a much smaller number then anyone else would think.

And none of that invalidates anything I said about the owners wealth having anything to do with the CBA. The CBA will be a negotiated agreement between the players and the NFL. The fact that Paul Allen owns stock in Microsoft and help build the business into the behemoth that it is today has nothing to do with football. He earned that money long before he became an owner.

His only concern is to ensure that his business of football is profitable, regardless of other wealth he has attained. The business of football is the business of football. Whether his football team is making money or not I have no clue, but I can guarantee you that he is going to try and make as much as he can from football operations.

The judge ruled a couple weeks back that the owners have no right to the 4 billion dollars, so that isn't money they will be seeing during the lockout as they had hoped.

A players tax situation, what he pays an agent, any management fees, accounting fees, etc are of no consequence to the owners. The players weren't forced at gun point to hire agents, PR people, managers, accountants and any other entity they may have to pay. They choose to do so on their own accord and are willing to forgo a percentage of their income for this expertise.

Billionaires pay a lot in taxes as well as millionaires and like any normal citizen they try and minimize how much they pay to Uncle Sam; the players need to do the same thing. If you aren't doing this, then shame on you, that's no ones fault but yours, unless, of course, you believe it's your civic duty to pay as much in taxes as possible.

I'm not familiar enough with the anti-trust laws to make comment and therefore I won't.

But, I still stand by my thoughts that the owners wealth is of no consequence here, it's there's, they've earned it and the fact that it allows them to do things only less than 1% of America can do has nothing to do with how they negotiate a deal for one of their businesses known as NFL football.

Pappy

feltdizz

03-17-2011, 04:07 PM

A players tax situation, what he pays an agent, any management fees, accounting fees, etc are of no consequence to the owners. The players weren't forced at gun point to hire agents, PR people, managers, accountants and any other entity they may have to pay. They choose to do so on their own accord and are willing to forgo a percentage of their income for this expertise.

No one held the owner at gun point and told them to overpay for players or build new stadiums.

The owners are willing to forgo a % of their profits for the expertise of the players.

I see nothing wrong with the players telling the owners they feel as though they are worth a certain amount and sticking with it.

papillon

03-17-2011, 11:17 PM

A players tax situation, what he pays an agent, any management fees, accounting fees, etc are of no consequence to the owners. The players weren't forced at gun point to hire agents, PR people, managers, accountants and any other entity they may have to pay. They choose to do so on their own accord and are willing to forgo a percentage of their income for this expertise.

No one held the owner at gun point and told them to overpay for players or build new stadiums.

Absolutely 100% truth tight there. I don't blame either side for trying to negotiate the best deal for themselves. The owners just can't help themselves when it comes to paying (overpaying) for labor. The players deserve everything they can get and so do the owners.

The owners are willing to forgo a % of their profits for the expertise of the players.

Yup, just like every other business. An employee gets paid based on whether or not the owner, president, etc can perform certain tasks, such as, accounting, if they can't, they forgo a portion of their revenue to pay an accountant. The accountant and the owner negotiate a salary, benefits etc., the employee tries to get the most he/she can and the owner tries to pay as little he/she can.

I see nothing wrong with the players telling the owners they feel as though they are worth a certain amount and sticking with it.

You're worth what someone will pay you and owners have showed very little restraint in this area.

And, all of this has nothing to do with an owners wealth and running a football team for profit. :P

Pappy

hawaiiansteel

03-18-2011, 03:25 PM

Steelers Team Report

Yahoo! Sports
3/17

INSIDE SLANT

Pittsburgh coaches and scouts are fanning out across the country for pro day workouts in a business-as-usual stand for them. Having played in the Super Bowl, Steelers players normally would be taking it slow about now anyway - Mike Tomlin set up a later schedule for workouts in 2009 after they won the Super Bowl.

The back-and-forth between owners and players have taken root on both sides in Pittsburgh as well.

Art Rooney II, president of the team and son of past labor peacemaker Dan, said he was surprised the players walked out of their final mediation meeting and did not extend the CBA by another week so they could continue talking.

“To me, that sort of was the tipoff that they weren’t really interested in getting serious,” said Rooney, a member of the 10-man NFL management council executive committee involved in the negotiations. “What we offered them, there’s no reason why they wouldn’t take it and look at it. They could have said, ‘That’s not enough, we need more.’ That wouldn’t have been surprising. But, to not even take it, I’m not sure what purpose that served.

“That was probably another indication they weren’t that interested. It made us think this was their plan all along.”

Safety Ryan Clark, the Steelers’ player rep, did not cite that quote but responded sarcastically to it the next day.

“That’s exactly what we wanted to do—not have a union,” Clark said. “C’mon, that’s ridiculous. It’s kind of hypocritical for owners to say that when you have a plan with the TV networks for when the games aren’t even played. If that doesn’t show that was your plan all along, I don’t know what does.”

Clark had a more incendiary quote that hit home personally in Pittsburgh. He said his daddy did not give him his job, he had to work for it. Ouch. Art Rooney Sr. founded the Steelers and was succeeded by his son Dan Rooney as president and now HIS son Art Rooney II is president.

Rooney, a lawyer who was general partner in his own firm before joining the Steelers fulltime about 10 years ago, said he was baffled by the union’s decertification.

“If you look at the way labor unions conduct themselves, this is a very unusual way to conduct business,” Rooney said. “It’s usually not encouraged by the courts. The idea is to encourage people to get to the table and bargain. That’s not what this is.”

Clark stood by the union’s position that it had little choice.

“Decertification was a reactionary measure, something you have to be forced into doing,” Clark said. “If that’s what we wanted to do, if that was our first choice, why haven’t we done it all along? I think that’s the owners just trying to form public perception.

“Anyone who looks at it rationally will see that everything comes out of their camp is for a lockout. If we were striking, that’s on us. But we’re not striking. We’re locked out. We didn’t opt out of the CBA. How’s it decertification when we never made a move before that we wanted to decertify? (The owners) want to take $650 million off (the top) this year and $800 million the next, and we’re going to keep giving you the money when we don’t know why you need it?”

Rooney also reiterated management’s position that the decertification by the union was a “sham” and hoped the NLRB will rule favorably on the owners’ filing of an unfair labor practice against the union because of it.

Quote To Note: “Obviously we’d like the deal to get done. No one wants to miss any part of the season.” - Defensive end Nick Eason(notes).

NOTES, QUOTES

• The Pittsburgh Steelers Footballers have changed their name. Real Steelers have been playing basketball in the offseason since 1969, usually before big crowds for charity events. The lockout is on and so is the basketball, but they’re now playing as the Pittsburgh All-Star Footballers Basketball Team.

“You have no idea when this thing will be settled,” said one player, backup safety Ryan Mundy. “The worst thing that you can do is be caught unprepared.”

• Burt Lauten, the team’s No. 2 PR man, will serve as interim communications coordinator after Dave Lockett left the team after 13 seasons. Lauten is expected to get the job permanently.

• The Steelers plan no layoffs, no furloughs and no cuts in pay. Team president Art Rooney said the Steelers have instituted a “salary freeze” in the organization.

“We’re going to take it a week at a time,” Rooney said. “We’re not planning any large-scale layoffs or furloughs. Hopefully, we won’t get to that situation.”

• Dan Rooney, Ambassador to Ireland, voiced his opposition to the proposed 18-game schedule last fall. In its last proposal, management took it off the table.

“On our side, that was a fairly major concession,” Art Rooney said. “There were people on our side not happy about putting that offer off the table.”

• Sharing a complex that works more like a duplex with Pitt can be advantageous for the Steelers at times like these. Each NFL team is permitted to have 30 draft prospects in for a visit but a rule allows teams to have players visit if they are in the same city and not count against that number.

1. Cornerback: Ike Taylor’s contract is up and while they want to re-sign him, they will be in more dire trouble if they do not. They do not have another decent corner on the team and many defenses need three of them.

2. Tackle: The Steelers have not drafted an offensive tackle in the top two rounds in the past 10 years other than Marvel Smith, their only Pro-Bowl tackle in this century. Their top three tackles are Flozell Adams, who turns 36; Max Starks, coming off neck surgery; and Willie Colon, who did not play in 2011 because of a June Achilles rupture.

3. Guard: Three different players started at right guard last season and their starting left guard, Chris Kemoeatu, has frustrated them for a couple years now. Right now, Doug Legursky might be the best answer there and he also went undrafted.

Medical Watch: WR Hines Ward has put off surgery to repair a dislocated thumb until after his competition on Dancing With the Stars.